Rationalization of the death penalty only equates to judicial murder. The same judges inflict unnecessary pain on the loved ones of the executed. If what we are all striving for is less pain, than we should not be advocating more. There are no easy answers, nor is there a clear line of right and wrong. Individual free will leads to differences within us all.
People believe that it is cruel because they think it is inhumane to take away someone 's life no matter what law they have broken.”No one has ever come to say that this did not hurt” (5 Arguments). People do not believe in “an eye for an eye” anymore. They would rather see the criminal in jail rather dead. It has been proven that it is more expensive to kill someone with any of the methods of death than to keep them in prison for life where they can not get out and hurt someone ever again. In some cases, determining the environment, prison can be a lot more worse than being put to death.
Capital Punishment In my opinion capital punishment is wrong. The death penalty is the center of much debate in society. This is due, in part, to the fact that people see only the act of killing a criminal, and not the social effects the death penalty has on society as a whole. Upon reading about the death penalty, it was found to be an unethical practice. It promotes a violent and inhumane society in which killing is considered okay.
An innocent victim by the name of “Steven Truscott was wrongly convicted of murder… It was horrible for Truscott and the victim 's family because the real culprit got away with murder” (Wheeler). So far, under this horrifying system, “17 innocent people sentenced to death have been exonerated and released based on DNA evidence, and 112 other people based on other evidence” ("An Indefensible Punishment”). As long as the death penalty exists, there will be risks of executing innocent people. It must be abolished permanently and substituted by a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. Society 's needs of punishment and protection can be met without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment.
Consequently, there are laws in place that allow the punishment of murder, by murder. Society's integrity is diminished every time a criminal is executed. The very tenets of modern organization are opposed to the notion of capital punishment, yet this is constantly defied and ignored by the American legal system. If no changes are made and the death penalty remains an acceptable form of punishment, it is inevitable that this correctional method will bleed throughout the American legal system and be utilized for "potential murderers" and small-time thieves. The mentality that encourages organized murder in the name of justice is doomed to devour the society that supports it, creating a totalitarian culture governed by paranoia.
What kind of society can go around killing people immediately for crimes that may be persuaded by others or assured by racial demographics? One may argue that the people that undergo these abhorrent felonies deserve to die and that “they wanted it”. Even if they did want it, that shouldn’t have an impact on what the punishment should be. If anything that should make a greater point to why these criminals should be put in jail, so that they can suffer for what they have done. The death penalty is wrongful in many aspects and should not be prohibited in any states, no matter what the circumstances are.
We should not, therefore, punish the murderer with death. Capital punishment is a barbaric remnant of uncivilized society. The death penalty is unfair because it does not single out the worst of the worst. Instead of going for big bad offenders, the death penalty is used on an arbitrary group. Such factors ... ... middle of paper ... ...is a killing chain.
An easy way to answer these questions is to totally nullify capital punishment completely. One reason why the death penalty is so controversial is because many feel its cruel ways of punishment are unnecessary, even if the crime is murder, whether it be premeditated or unintentional. They believe there are other ways of condemnation besides execution. In the case of an unintentional death feelings are that the perpetrators should have the right to live, but have to face each day with the fact that they killed someone weighing on their conscience. On the other hand, such as with a voluntary murder, the ideas are somewhat similar.
I agree, and do not think it is fair for someone who murdered and raped innocent people should be able to have these luxuries. The death penalty isn't necessarily the answer though. Inmates shouldn’t have the privileges of watching television, and should have more of a punishment. The opposing group presented their ideas and examples that supported why the death penalty is wrong, and non-effective. One thing they mentioned was that we do not have the resources, nor the money to make 100% sure that someone is guilty of the crime they are accused of.
Humans, as a genus, are known for their mistakes. However, in the circumstance of the death penalty, oversight becomes too precarious. The innocent souls that have been taken with the sanction from our government should be enough to eradicate capital p... ... middle of paper ... ...the conterversal gravity of capital punishment is one of the most questionable issue within the united states. The punishment for murder is growing smaller and smaller. A judge can sentence a man to life within prison, and the same man most like will be in jail for fifiteen years max.